On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:

On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 04:48:46PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:

quoted

I'm resending the reapswap patch for inclusion into -ac series. 

Isn't it broken in this state?  Checking page_count, page->buffers and
PageSwapCache without the appropriate locks is dangerous.

We hold the pagemap_lru_lock, so there will be no one doing lookups on
this swap page (get_swapcache_page() locks pagemap_lru_lock).

Am I overlooking something here? 

mm/shmem.c:shmem_getpage_locked() and mm/swapfile.c:try_to_unuse()
call delete_from_swap_cache_nolock(), both holding page lock,
neither holding pagemap_lru_lock.

Unless you hold the page lock, PageSwapCache(page) and page->index
are volatile, but to find swap_count(page) you have to rely on both
of them.  TryLockPage()?

Hugh

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/